Thanks for a great series of videos on the Martini Henry rifle and the making of the ammunition for the several variants. If you ever plan to visit Scotland, let me know and I’ll teach you how to wear and walk in a kilt Thanks again, really enjoyed your videos.
Man that gun sounds awesome. And packs a punch :) Been watching some of your vids and I'm thoroughly enjoying them. The background stories are epic as well. Keep up the great work!
Joseph Gillon I don't see how anybody could get a dislocated shoulder from firing a Martini... Was it sore after many, many rounds? Yes... I'm sure it was.
I sure do appreciate the effort that you put into these videos. I am so excited to be getting a M-H again, it’s been too long. Watching your videos really made me realize how much I miss mine.
One theory on the reason for the British defeat at Isandlwana was that the rapid firing of the MH led to the barrels overheating and fouling. Sounds a more plausible reason than the discredited, but still aired, theory that the ammo boxes couldn't be opened quickly enough or, even sillier, that they turned out to be boxes of biscuits...
I strongly encourage you to read "How Can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook. Brushes by all the bumf, and focusses on the manoeuvre and real reasons the battle was lost. This is a great book.
Another sensible and informative presentation. My one reservation is that in an open engagement, the opportunity for prone shooting might be limited. I have only used the Martini-Henry action in a .22 target rifle many years ago (four decades +) but I have to admit that as far as I can recall, it was much easier to use than a BSA bolt action rifle using .22 in the prone position (but the BSA was a more accurate firearm).
John Brooks Very interesting point. Would you care to elaborate on your "reservation"? I should think that there would be no less opportunity than any other position. Obviously, vegetation, etc,... would play a part. Were you speaking of this kind of "restriction" (terrain based) or more about the battle formation making it more unlikely? I'd echo your point about the speed of the action vs a bolt... In single fire, though I have not timed it properly, it does feel like the Martini is faster than my Metford. Cheers.
britishmuzzleloaders I think it rather depends on whether the rifle was being used by a line regiment where standing and kneeling were usually the major (only?) options or by a Rifle Coy when a two man unit acting independently and perhaps, covertly.
John Brooks continued - Infantry engagements were likely to follow the 'Waterloo' pattern until very late in the 19th century when the Boer War made those tactics obsolete and the Martini-Henry already was a thing of the past.
John Brooks I see what you are getting at. The Franco-Prussian War was a bit of a watershed, though. It took a bit of time to come up with a tactical solution of their own but by 1877 it was in print... The 1877 Field Exercise and Evolutions of Infantry clearly delineates the "new" way of fighting. I might direct you here www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=9531 . This is a conversation about the very thing you mention.... Extended order tactics were used a great deal beforehand during the Mutiny and other post Crimean actions but were typically used for screening and skirmishing and not as a way to bring the main body into action. In the 1877 FE&E, they were enshrined as the primary method of attack and defence. The wars in the Cape leading up to the AZW featured them prominently and, in fact, the bulk of the Battle of Islandlwana was fought in extended order, initially, quite successfully I might add... It was the fact that the British were outflanked and not overwhelmed frontally that ultimately led to the demise of the forces there... Now, were these tactics used at every opportunity? The wars of the mid-to-late Victorian era are awash with bad judgment on behalf of the senior leadership. Magersfontein being a classic example... Lang's Nek another... battalions caught in column or even (inexplicably) quarter column, far too close to the enemy before extending... This speaks to the leadership and not necessarily the tactics as prescribed. The single rank fighting line was very much a part of training and operations of the Army of the day. In the "rank entire" fighting line, the men were free to choose their own positions to use. Prone, kneeling, or standing were all prescribed according to the cover at hand. The notion that the later Victorian Army fought exclusively in the two rank, close order line of Waterloo is somewhat misleading. The default formation from the late 1870s was "Extended Order" and although the close order formation was indeed used in 2 and 4 ranks, this was a tactical adaptation to the mass onset of an enemy host as at Abu Klea and Ulundi and indeed later at Omdurman, and a need to effectively eliminate the flanks of the forces on the field. Anyway, thanks for clarifying your observations. I enjoy discussing these things as you may be aware :-). Cheers.
Ripping video , old chap. Much appreciated. I'm an old fart who has shot both long rifle and carbine Martini Henry originals and had the bruises to prove it. :-) Not nearly as fast as you though. I'm from Tasmania btw...once the pink bit at the bottom of the globe. :-) Cheerypips.
Not in twenty years or so, I'm afraid. The Martinis belonged to two friends, one who had an artillery model carbine, passed down from his grandfather and another who was a collector/dealer who had several M-H rifles over the years. I still retain a strong gut feeling for these particular guns though. Zulu and all that, I guess. Cheers.
Whoa, who would have thought that all this time scrounging for supplies I'd need to reload my own .577/450 the guy you recommended for brass lives only six hours away across the state! Excellent video, and it's always nice seeing videos pop up showcasing these wonderful old rifles
In 1968 (12 years old), I bought one for $35 through the mail. I got ten rounds of ammo in one of those heavily waxed little boxes. After shooting those ten rounds, we couldn't find .577/.450 ammo anywhere. After a year, my uncle sold the rifle for $100. I saw one converted to .303 for $400. I should have bought it.
+britishmuzzleloaders What i dont understand is.,, you grab the rounds from your pouch.. but why dont you grab like 3 at once. Everytime you have to look down to your pouch is time you miss shooting.
Ricardo8388 My thoughts are that this technique is very much a "range-ism". A parlour trick... Done to show how fast you can shoot a breechloader like the Martini. Most of the time, those that demonstrate this are shooting at nothing, or nothing that represents a man at military ranges, anyway....."Look at how fast I can shoot the Martini!..I'm not hitting anything, but look at all the smoke!"...This is completely inapplicable to military shooting.. If you examine where the time in the loading and firing sequence is taken up, most of it is during aiming.... This is increased as the range does... Ever tried to hit a target with a hand full of rounds jammed into your mitt while trying hold the forestock? How about taking a handful of rounds out of the pouch (with the right hand), then transferring them all without dropping any, to the left hand, while the left hand is holding the rifle? Can it be done? Somewhat, but it just doesn't have any context in the contemporary musketry practices. Not at all "the drill"..... That said, you are not the first person to mention this. This will be the subject of an upcoming video!... Thanks!
britishmuzzleloaders Yeah my point was that there is a way inbetween taking 1 bullet from your pouch at a time.. and placing all the bullets infront of you. I understand that 1 was for when you possibly want to move and the other was more stationary. tldr": I suggested this as way inbetween. Thanks for your reply. and Ill hope to see that vid. bb
i liked this whole 'experiment" something that isnt considered is that one of these rounds would easily go through a man and kill the unfortunate behind him. These bullets do horrific things to flesh
Great video as always, but in the start sequence I expected you to go "It's......" as it was reminiscent of the style of the opening to Monty Python.....
Sean, There is a book by a guy called (Colonel) Mike Snook who wrote (among others), "Beyond the reach of Empire: Wolseleys Failed Campaign to Save Gordon & Khartoum". In it he deals at some length with firing tactics of the MH especially as the Battle of Abu Klea was fought with the short lever MH & was where the British square was supposedly broken. From memory, the approved method (in a square) was for the MH to open fire at 600 yards, the killing really started at 400 approx. & usually the enemy went to ground or died by 150 yards. Unfortunately at Abu Klea the enemy swarmed out from a sunken Wadi only 150-200 yards away & they had skirmishers out of the square as well. Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem to commemorate this fight. Approx. 12 years later when the British came back to smash the Mahdi's army they had transitioned to the Lee Metford & none of the enemy got closer than 800 or so yards. The Egyptian troops fighting with the Brits & armed with the MH stopped the enemy at some 250-300 yards. Both were in square & the ground was flat & open. A good book to read, especially in conjunction with watching this video, which I really enjoyed...keep them coming :) Peter By the way Mike Snook was the last commander of the 24th before amalgamation & while in the UN forces in the Sudan he visited & walked the battlefields there.
Peter Martini I'm a bit confused if your comment is directed at me or someone else (I'm Rob, by the way) .... I don't see a reference to a "Sean" in these comments and am a little confused. That said, I have all of Mike's books and they are amongst the best written military history books I have read. I think that the tactics of the day are best described as those that army trained with and those that were developed in theatres according to immediate needs... The baseline tactics of the high victorian era were very much of the extended order variety, intended to be used against, what today we might call "first world enemies".. These figured prominently in the first phases of Islandlwana and were successful in developing firepower enough to stop the advance of the Zulus to the front (as I am sure you are aware). The resort to close order tactics was required due to small forces operating in open country with no way to channel the advance of the enemy to the front. That and having to protect the baggage left the only resort of closing up and forming all-round defence... To say that "the British fought in squares" (my quotes here) is a bit like saying the modern army fights from Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) and with open topped, light vehicles (as they have done in Afghanistan) rather than with tanks and IFVs and bags of Armoured Artillery and Engineer Support... Similar tactics were used at Omdurman, yes, but they weren't in square.. They were in a curved line with the flanks anchored on the Nile with gunboats in support. The ranges that the enemy were engaged at were astonishing though, weren't they? Your use of the word "smash" is quite appropriate... As you might notice, I like talking tactics, especially when in conduction with the rifles shown here on the channel.. Thank you so much for your input. Cheers.
britishmuzzleloaders Rob,Sorry about that......I will claim a senior moment :( & my apologies).I have finally found & just moved on to "Khartoum: The Ultimate Imperial Adventure" by Michael Asher, so I hope to learn a bit more about Omdurman. I have only found bits & pieces in general history's to this point.It would be interesting to test the Lee Metford against the MH for rate of fire...probably double at least.Cheers, Peter
Peter Martini No problem at all, my good man. Just wanted to make sure that it was intended for me, that's all (not wanting to interrupt a conversation you might be having with someone else) If you haven't seen it yet, ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html I did a similar video with the Lee Metford... I suppose that I could combine the two into a side by side.... But for now, the two are stand-alone clips... Interesting results I must say. I had fun doing both, for sure. Omdurman was certainly the best example of the capabilities of the magazine rifle in "savage warfare". One thing to note though, rate of fire surprisingly has very little to play in these battles with great distances involved... Almost all fire was delivered in volleys, measured and deliberate... No that said, the back corner of the square and Abu Klea, certainly had it's share of rapid independent fire, I'd be willing to bet!!!
Great vid, I didn't know single shot rifles were capable of such rates of fire. Potentially 15 aimed shots in a minute with a ready and convenient supply of ammo? That's the kind of rate of fire I'd expect from a Mauser or Mosin.
Brilliant, thank you. At Rorke's Drift. as I'm sure you know, each capable man fired over 200 rounds and barrels got REALLY hot as well as fouled. I once fired 50 rounds rapid from my Mk IV and was in pain from recoil around 40 and when I'd finished 'em all I wondered at the stoicism of the troops firing 200 and more but then, of course, they were fighting for their lives. I get my brass from the same source as you and it's great and certainly the best value for money anywhere. Thanks again, mate.
Cheers mate. Martin is a Brit who lived in Oz and now Washington state. I'm a Brit who came straight from England to BC, Canada so I'm a trespasser in your, and now my country. I love Martin's brass and my bullet moulds come from him too, his prices are just marvellous and he's a very helpful bloke. I'm having fun lately with my 1896 MLE cavalry carbine. I can't afford a Metford so I'm using Pyrodex instead of smokeless and pretending it's really a Metford. I can't help it, I just love the smell of smoke. Have fun. Cheers and thanks again.
David Phillips Trespasser? Come on now.... May I ask why you are using Pyro in 303? (other than the "loving the smoke" bit) I just ask because there is a misconception out there that "Metfords" are specifically for black powder and nothing could be farther from the truth.
Yes mate. I know that I can use smokeless, I generally clean the bore a bit after shooting by running a few rounds of 4895 through. Much faster, more accurate and less recoil but it doesn't have that magic smell. I've got an old 1853 Enfield too and get more smoke from it, I'm a great polluter but can't help it. I'm a retired old fart so not very well off but I am saving up for a Brown Bess and maybe, one of these days, a Baker rifle (even more smoke from a flintlock). Even my handguns are black powder though the Tranter .455 and Enfield .476 can handle smokeless and I use it often but always revert to my filthy habits. Sadly, the Lower Mainland here doesn't have facilities for big bore shooting so we (my son and I) have to go into the bush to shoot; actually that's much better than any range. We always clean up afterwards and try to recover spent bullets too, people leave enough junk without us adding to it. Thanks a lot for the tip and if you're ever around here come and blow holes in stuff with us. I think it would be fun for all.
David Phillips I hope that I didn't come across as insulting your knowledge of these fine rifles.... I had no intention of being so. As you might imagine, I come by many people who believe that Metfords were for black powder and the way I read your post gave me the slightest impression that you might have been under that belief... WHEW! Glad to hear I was misunderstanding! A Tranter, eh? I fired one a few years ago in Alberta (I think that there is footage of it in one of the "Alberta Shoot" clips here on the Channel) Fantastic bit of Victorian technology, if somewhat complicated... Took a bit of getting used to, what with the "double" trigger. Glad to hear you are slowly working towards some more old stuff.. If you are at all handy, go for the Baker Kit from the Rifle Shoppe... Great project. Is your P53 an original?
Great job! According to accounts, some 23,000 rounds were fired at Rorke's Drift by a garrison of c.100 - that's 230 rounds per man over about 12 hours, although 10 of those were at night! Many suffered dislocated shoulders and some were forced to shoot left handed.
Dislocated shoulders are referenced in David Rattray’s account of the battle, in his audiobook, The Washing of the Spears. I think he refers to letters written by some of the 24th.
I guess some men must have fired over 300 cartridges of the older type (Durnford refers to thin brass, distorting and jamming in the breeches). Did these give more (or less) recoil? I also guess some shots would be rushed and the butts not secure in the shoulder. I've never fired a Martini but I have some experience of the .303 Lee Enfield and after many rounds, this leaves a bruise and is painful to shoot. We used to put our berets under our battledress for extra padding but it didn't make much difference. A comparison of recoil between the Martini and the SMLE would be interesting and between the original thin brass round and later hard casing. Incidentally I seem to remember Bromhead or Chard referring to burying some 370 Zulus and estimated that about 400 were carried away on war shields - 23,000 rounds and 770 enemy killed or wounded! Like Isandlwana, the outer area is littered with bullets and I picked one up and have it in my small collection...
I know Durnford died at Isandlwana and I'm referring to Rattray's book again - regarding the jamming of the thin brass cartridges. I have one and examples are on display at the Royal Welsh Museum in Brecon - they look quite fragile.
I'd love to see how the Martini-Henry compares side-by-side with the Springfield 1873 trapdoor in terms of rate of fire when both are being used by practiced shooters. It seems like the mechanism of the Martini-Henry is a lot less troublesome than that of the Springfield, even without the anecdotal evidence of horrendous failures to eject...
I imagine that it would be somewhere in between the Snider and the Martini. You still have to deal with the lock but it has an extractor that functions a bit more efficiently when compared to the Snider.
Great job as usual. I have been hoping with the good weather we have been having that you would get out and produce a new video. Vicariously yours, Gunner
Definitely perfect weather for a shoot.... Cool but magnificent.... Cheers. Wanted to stay and do more but only had the time for 1 1/2..... I began another on finer points of Martini shooting.... Cheers.
An interesting era, very transitional. With one foot in the archaic and one foot modern. I would've rather had a Henry rifle if I had the choice, but I don't think the British soldiers were allowed that. lol Thanks for taking the time and putting these vids together!
+LordDigz12 Hi there... It was generally regarded that the repeating arms of the era were woefully under powered for the ranges that it was envisaged engagements were to take place at. The mechanisms weren't strong enough for the kinds of cartridges that gave the requisite velocities and ranges. Hence most militaries, including the US Army, stayed with full bore 45cal cartridges... 577/450, 45/70, etc... and single shot breech loaders. From a personal defence standpoint, I agree, something like a Henry would have been very useful.. The SMG of it's day, I suppose.
I think the bigger reason the Brits didn't want to use American technology was because of their own pride. Especially after the Winchesters started coming out with bigger bore cartridges. It was clearly superior, but it wasn't British so it was frowned upon by her Queens military. They never really adopted lever guns to any extent, they just skipped into the bolt guns. I'm wondering if they had some battles against mausers where they got their butt whipped and had to switch to a bolt gun. Even then, everyone else used a Mauser action for the most part and they had to make their own bolt design with the Lee Enfields. Brits are a funny lot, gotta do it their own way or it doesn't count. Yanks are more practical, willing to use whatever technology that works, who cares where it came from.
LordDigz12 I can't say that I'm in total agreeance with some of your points... I don't typically delve into generalizations about national character, so maybe the facts as I know them... What was the main service rifle of the US Army before the Krag? I don't believe it was the Henry or the Winchester.... It was the Trapdoor Springfield in 45-70, if I'm not mistaken. A single shot breechloader..... As for using other peoples designs, the first breechloader in British (and Empire) Service was the Snider-Enfield... with an American (Snider) invented breech mechanism attached to the existing British (Enfield) barrel. The next rifle, the Martini-Henry, was the product of a Swiss (Martini) action and a Scot's (Henry) barrel. Their first repeating rifle was an American (Lee) action with an Englishman's (Metford) barrel. The development of military firearms was quite similar in the two countries, when you look at the timelines...
Gosh I love your vids :D So british ^^ There should be a german version of you too out there :) German (late XIXth cent) war-culture is awesome too. PS: and a french one aswell :D
Blank- blade Thanks for the kind words. Yes a German "version" would be most interesting. Needle Rifles and percussion muskets for comparison... Fantastic! Now, some-one needs to step up... :-) Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders Don't forget the Mauser 71, Mauser 71/84, the 1888 Commission rifle or the Mauser G98, all very interesting rifles. I have actually given thought to creating a channel that would be either a German or French version of your channel, do you have any recommendations for doing so, especially sources for information about German or French equipment, uniforms and regulations of the era?
You look like you could have walked out of one of those photographs toward the end! Would love for you to find a way to test something akin to the early rolled brass and foil cartridges and see how they stood up to rapid fire. Thanks for another great video.
RabidMortal1 Yes, that would be a great test... Unfortunately, as you indicate, a very rare and expensive undertaking... As much as I would like to see that experiment, I'll have to pass... :-). Thanks for the kind words.
+britishmuzzleloaders yes there were 2 people in my family in the boer wars and when they came back to Canada they brought 3 martini henrys with them one is marked vr Enfield 1887 IV 1 and the other 2 have had the main markings worn off,show more use but still function.
+britishmuzzleloaders yes there were 2 people in my family in the boer wars and when they came back to Canada they brought 3 martini henrys with them one is marked vr Enfield 1887 IV 1 and the other 2 have had the main markings worn off,show more use but still function.
I wonder how big of a difference it would've made if the British soldiers at Isandlwana had been issued with drawn brass cartridges instead of the flimsy brass foil ones, as the latter apparently often caused jams after about 20 rounds fired.
@@britishmuzzleloaders Well according to documentation they had issues with the brass foil expanding and getting stuck in the breech. Also they tested it with brass foil casings in a modern experiment where it seiged up after about 20 rounds. It's why they switched to drawn brass cartridges and a longer lever.
@@bellator11 What sources are you referring to? Apart from routine stoppages and the like, the performance of the rifle and ammunition did not detract from the overall performance of the Infantry. i.e. ammunition was not a factor in the defeat. As for the "modern experiment", please show me where to find a reference to shooting 20 foil cartridges for science. I am very keen to know more. It all raises interesting questions. If ammunition was so horrible and compromising of the effectiveness of the Infantry, then why is it that there is nothing associated with the performance of the same unit at Rorkes drift where the men fired many times the amount fired per man at Isandlwana... How did they win at that later battle?.... It's because the rifles and their ammunition performed the way they were intended and as well as any of the era. While there were indeed major issues with the ammunition in the Sudan, later in the 1880s, these were related to the way in which the cartridges were carried and the conditions of service in that campaign. It was this event that led to the manufacture of drawn brass which incidentally never fully replaced the foil versions. The long lever was indeed an "upgrade" to the overall design but was never used in British regular service. The short lever Mk II being the primary arm of Army units it's replacement with the Lee Metford in the early 1890s. If you are interested, I heartily recommend acquiring Neil Aspinshaw's great book on the Martini. By far the best reference on the subject.
@@britishmuzzleloaders The experiment I am refering to was carried out for a documentary made in the early 2000's, you can watch it here: ruclips.net/video/2rAQBWdi1Og/видео.html
@@bellator11 Thanks for that. I am indeed familiar with that piece. So much of it is such conjecture. The temperature of a barrel "soaring" to 45C?.... hardly soaring... a bit of sensationalizing going on there. And there is more... how does barrel fouling equate to coating the "highly machined precision fit" parts? How is it that gases coat the inside of the action body?... they don't of course. More bunk for the benefit of the camera and pushing a narrative. The cases he shows, are not "damaged".. they are the way they came. The breech of the Martini was made large to accept the somewhat loose tolerances associated with the ammunition. He does indeed experience a "jam" of sorts but have a close look... he hardly pushes at all when he is loading it and then puts no effort into trying to extract it... turning to his partner like some sort of lost puppy... clearly not familiar with the weapon. What is the ammunition they are using?... they don't show the use of original rounds for some inexplicable reason.... Did they load them themselves?.... Did they include the proper, fouling managing wax inside? I don't know... but neither does anyone else as they don't bother to explain anything. "The only tool a soldier had was his bayonet (to remove a stuck case) "????? how about the cleaning rod that every rifle had.... Again, pandering to some crazy notion and an audience that is uneducated on the subject.... "The few seconds wasted by one gun jamming could have been the weak link in the British line"...... I mean really... are they familiar at all with military operations of the era? It goes on and on.... "It is statistically, almost certain,.. that guns jammed that day"....... Of course they did.... While there were stoppages and jams, as there are in every action, and there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that there were specific examples with the Natal Native Mounted Contingent under Durnford, "jamming rifles" was not a cause of the defeat. How did they win at Ulundi? Rorkes Drift? Kambula? Gingindlovu?.... It all does not add up.
Hey, that target can be fixed! Hammer on it a bit to flatten it out, a nice welding job, a bit of bondo and prime and paint. Good as new! Better be a biiiggg hammer tho... Maybe just get another one. Excellent video!
On the topic of the barrel heating up I have heard (not seen direct sources however) that at Rorke's Drift the fighting was so fierce that during the night some of the British soldiers' martinis started to glow they were so hot - It'd be very interesting if true. Great quality video as per usual by the way
hookypig Most rifles, on campaign, I understand, had a rawhide cover that wrapped around the rifle between the receiver and the backsight, just for that purpose... Later the "hand guard" concept, albeit one of wood, was incorporated into the design of the Lee Metford and the later Martini-Metfords. I should think that putting a black powder round into a red hot barrel would be quite dangerous with ignition coming soon after (if it actually happened the way your indirect sources claim).... Sorry, not going to make a video about that one! :-)
britishmuzzleloaders On the heating up on the Martini at Rorke's Drift it was said that many tore away there Frock/Tunic sleeves to wrap around the barrel of the rifle, it was that hot ?
hookypig Yes, it does take much longer to cool the barrel down when it is in direct (and warm) sunlight.... Terry, there are always things that happen that are anomalies, but widespread ripping off of ones sleeves, the sleeves of the only garment they had, less the greatcoat, seems a little far fetched... Maybe the sleeves of the dead??? Maybe their grey backs? ... It was often a practice to have a hand guard of rawhide around the barrel. Now, did the 2/24th, being new to SA, have such things? You would have thought that they might have learned from their 1st Bn, who had been in SA much longer, about the ramifications of high rates of fire...
The fact you can put that number of aimed rounds down in the time it takes a man to run 100m fills me with admiration at the courage and discipline of the Zulu warrior. Even though, and no offence Rob, a 20 year old Impi Warrior would cover that ground in less time.
Great clip and rifle. This example would also give an idea regarding the Austro - Prussian (1866) and Franco - Prussian (1870) Wars in terms of the advantage of how the Prussians had the breech-loading Dreyse Needle Gun compared to the Austrians who still had muzzle-loaders, and in the Franco Prussian War the French had the Chassepot Rifle with it's rubber ring seal / range 1.500 metres (versus 600 metres for the Dreyse): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War . Regards.
+Film & TV Yes the Prussians certainly had the advantage against the Austrians (and the Danes). They compensated for the lack of range in their rifles with their artillery in the F-P war... Glad you liked the clip. Thanks.
I did a similar experiment with my 1889 Mk. II BSA&M. Started with 6 rounds stuck in the right side of my belt, to simulate loading from an expense pouch. Fired at a 50 yard gong target offhand, to simulate "fire into the brown of 'em!" Fired all 6 in 30 seconds and rang the bell 5 out of the 6.Now multiply that effort by an entire rifle company. Is it any wonder that the British Army kept the Martini in service as long as they did?
Nice! I like the fact that you tried to duplicate the function of equipment, even though you didn't have any... well done.. This is how you truly come to learn how these were used, not firing off a bench, or carrying your rounds about in a box.. (not that that is a bad thing, just not something to draw conclusions from).
My grandfather served with the 50th Battalion CEF, 1916-18 (10th Bde., 4th Cdn. Div.) Did some similar experiments 30 years ago with the P08 web equipment and a Ross Mk. III and Sht. LE Mk. III. As you said, I learned a lot from them. Unfortunately, I can't repeat them, because the waist belt shrunk in storage :-). Would have liked to do them with the Oliver equipment also, but I've never been able to assemble a complete set. Also did some WW-I demos for high school history classes (kitted-out a football player and used a deactivated Sht. LE Mk. III DP rifle) which were well received. Your videos are excellent and well researched. Thanks!
Oh?.... They were in extended line at the beginning, with large intervals and amongst rocks... By no means universal, but yes, they did lie down as cover and arcs allowed. As the withdrawal began and intensified, this became less and less until the companies were able to concentrate and by that time, the Zulu were close enough, and the battle fluid enough that standing of kneeling was more prudent...
Tee campez they did not want the winchester as they thought they would be too underpowered and when fighting tribes who do not fear death it may take a couple of rounds with the winchester but with a martini henry it would take a limb off
Top notch video again, great experiment and the results of which are of great value to anyone who is a keen student of this period. Hope you are able to find a new target for the next video. I can imagine what the rates of fire would be for the Lee Metford repeated out under the same conditions (hint hint) :)
Greg King Thank you very much. The target is still usable, if a little mangled.. I will probably just hammer the back of it into place and keep using it... But if I'm shooting 577/450, I'll reserve it for greater ranges.. As for the Lee Metford, I actually did a similar clip here... ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html It isn't quite the same, as I didn't put the shoot into any "tactical context" like I did with this one.. but did measure the time for three firing techniques that were performed with the MLM... That said, at Omdurman, volleys were opened at 1000+yds... and not one Dervish got within something like 500yds.. (reference required here, but it was a long way out) Those Dervishes advancing on the Native troops armed with the MH got to within 300 or so ( if I recall correctly) Now this wasn't just rifle fire but added to it was Artillery and gunboat fire.... Impressive nonetheless. Cheers.
Cheers Rob, very interesting stats, opening volleys at 1000 yds must have been a sight to be seen and heard. The Keri plain was well chosen ground I guess as it must have had a pretty good clear field of fire even allowing for heat haze and dust. A Dervish at 300yds is as close as I would want to get anyway. Look forward to the next video.
Greg King I did some more reading and I was a little "off" with the "1000+" comment... It would seem that, though I was not incorrect, the range was a much more extreme 2000ish yds.... With the enemy stopped at 800yds...... The Martini armed troops had a smaller, though no less safe coupling of ranges... 1000 and 500yds, respectively.... With these kind of ranges, the MLMs would have used their long range volley sights (dial sights) as the ladder maxed out at 1800... Of course, the Martini only had the ladder sight...
Still devastating effects at these ranges and the last great Battle against mass irregulars. I've given you a shout out on our Die Hards facebook page and the chaps are well impressed by your videos.
Greg King Thank you so much... I try in my own way... I like to call what I do "Historical Shooting"... I like to think of it as a small but "potent" genre of historical interpretation. What I don't have is some mates to practice and develop the shooting more. File firing, Independent firing, etc.. stuff that needs more than one man.... Live fire with a couple of files worth of interested parties would hit the nail on the head. Thanks again for your very generous comments. Cheers.
I saw a documentary that discovered the rifle would jam after about 15 rounds because the barrels for extremely hot. Would be interesting to see how long rapid fire can be maintained for before a jam.
+thewyj Although this video doesn't show more than 10 rounds fired (with no hint of bad extractions mind you) I have fired upwards of 20 in one application... The rifle was very not, too hot to touch. No problems. I think that lots of the TV and internet claims as presented in documentaries are baseless, or certainly out of context, rambling... They never back up anything they say with historical facts... How did they "discover" these "facts"?...... Did they use historical, rolled case ammo in some experiments? Did they uncover some documents that related to testing? Martini jamming is far more convoluted than a simple statement saying it jams after 15 rounds, and much more anecdotal... Were there jamming issues? Yes.... most sensationally during the Sudan Campaigns in the mid1880s... An inquiry was had and drawn brass made and shipped very quickly to the troops there. As for the test you mention, pushing my rifle by firing relentlessly until it jams is not quite on my list of must-dos.. :-) .... Though the experiment is a good one and would be good to do with "someone else's rifle"... :-) BTW, which documentary were you watching? Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders Yea I agree. I did wonder how many times they had to repeat the "test" before it did jam and then they simply put that version into the final edit and claim "there you are you see! It jams ALL the time!" The claim for the jam was that the cartridges used black powder which left a residue inside the chamber each time it was fired, eventually the residue build up meant a fresh round would not fit in. I cannot remember the name of the documentary because it was many years ago when I was going through my imperial musket and rifle fighting phase, but it focussed on the British defeat at Isandlwana. The programme wanted to assert that one of the reasons the Brits lost was because the rifles jammed, but then in the same programme they asserted that the British were not firing in shoulder-to-shoulder formation and instead maintained a very spread out defensive perimeter. They based this on finding groups of ejected cartridges found in the ground which were 8-10 feet apart, where soldiers had been standing and firing. Shoulder-to-shoulder formation would have resulted in much more concentrated casings apparently (makes sense I guess, not an expert). So they sort of undermined their own argument within the space of 20 minutes. I do remember one thing that was supported by your video and that was the power of the rifle. They tested a ballistic block and it passed through and into a second, indicating that a single bullet could probably hit two or more people if charging in dense formations. Thanks for your knowledgeable response by the way, makes me want to go away and do more research!
+thewyj Thanks for that... Perhaps the best book I have read specifically about Islandlwana is "How can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook. Fantastic book... So, extended order to begin the battle far in advance of the camp... yes... This is the way the Army trained to fight in the late 1870s and after... As the book explores, the reason that the battle was lost, was due to the untimely and uncoordinated withdrawal of the right flank (Durnford) due to lack of ammo and his being threatened by outflanking himself, which had a chain reaction effect and forced the main part of the fighting line (starting with it's right flank), which had been holding the "Chest" at bay, to conform.. This lessened the fire from the companies of the 24th and allowed the Chest to advance... Essentially the battle was won due to a massive outflanking and the disintegration of the fighting line and the resulting loss of the ability to maintain a steady fire that could have won the battle. As I said, a simply great book... Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders ah fantastic . I'll have to have a look at that book. I haven't visited this topic in years and suddenly I'm really excited about it again. A fascinating period of history.
+britishmuzzleloaders "due to lack of ammo" Anecdotally; The Quarter Master insisted on a written requisition for ammunition above the regulation amount, from the appropriate authority in the firing lines. The British quarter master corp also insisted that the paper 10 round pouched ammunition, be sealed in heavy tin containers lined with oiled heavy paper, which were then placed in heavy wooden boxes and screwed shut! Archaeological digs at Islandlwana have proven this out as a number of rifles butts were unearthed that had been broken, by soldiers using them to attempt to smash open the wooden ammunition boxes to gain access. Sad.
If the enemy was charging your position the time spent aiming would have been reduced greatly. Twelve shots a minute from the pouch would be doable especially if you grabbed two bullets at a time and palmed the second while you shot the first. I have to say that the Martini Henry rifle has a special place in military history: it combines a faster rate of fire and removes the paper cartridge but is still slow enough to warrant the old line system of firing of the musket age.
+Blake Titus It is interesting to note that the Army had evolved it's tactics in regards to fighting a similarly armed enemy... I presume that by "the old line system of firing of the musket age" you refer to a two rank, close order line? In actual fact, tactics introduced in the late 1870s prescribed a loose, single rank line with supports to the rear to plug gaps and re-enforce where necessary. This was used at Islandlwana and other lesser well known battles of the era all over the globe. There were obviously, times where close order formations were used, but these were predicated on the lack of anchored flanks, the need to protect the baggage (Ulundi and Abu Klea, etc..) and, most importantly, the lack of an effectively armed enemy rather than the development of firepower.
+britishmuzzleloaders thank you that is interesting. I suppose that when facing an European army loose ranks would mean less casualties and put an increased emphasis on marksmanship. The British being perhaps better trained and armed had the advantage against armies still fielding muskets. But when facing Zulus or a more melee focused army closer, double or even triple ranks would be needed to stop a charge, especially one which contains a lot of men, perhaps a wedge formation. Thanks for the info!
+Blake Titus If you are interested in the Zulu Wars and the tactics and formations used at Islandlwana, I might recommend Mike Snook's book, "How Can Man Die Better".... Single rank with large intervals did actually stop the Zulu.. It was the collapse of a flank that did the position (and the 24th) in that day.... Great read.
britishmuzzleloaders I've read that there were no real tactics involved at Isandlwana but utter chaos,desertion and pandemonium and all "led" by an officer with zero field experience. Is there any truth to that then?
Do you suppose that moustache-style could have an effect on rate of fire with a breech loading rifle? You know? More bushy, versus less bushy... upward curls as opposed to straight-tip? Perhaps different waxes? Excellent shooting, by the by.
excellent video, as i have come to expect from you good sir! i'd like to add, bertram brass, in australia, as a producer of correctly head stamped .577-.450 short chamber boxer cases also, i'm wondering haw many people caught the veiled reference to Lt. (later Col.) John Rouse Merriott Chard VC!!
kingswoodkid1985 Yes Bertram brass is certainly an option but it so very expensive. It's rim is certainly more robust than the 24g brass... as are the case walls. If it was in my budget, I'd be all over it... :-). Cheers.
no worries! now you know how us aussies feel regarding basically everything else! lol, just too damn expensive! thankfully, bertram is made here, so it's not budget breaking
Xavier Temple That is great news... Let me know when you get it... If you need brass, I recommend Martyn at xringservices@yahoo.com. Thinking of posting any clips of it? Look forward to hearing about it.
Great video! I love the Martini Action! Do you know what type of Infantry you show at 6:19? The group with the gray/black uniforms and the spiked pith helmets.
Glad you like it. They are KRRC (King's Royal Rifle Corps), distinguished by their red facings and piping, which were one of the two "english" Rifle Regiments... The other being the Rifle Brigade. They are wearing rifle green uniforms, including a rifle green "Home Service Helmet", with 1882 Pattern Valise Equipment and probably carrying Mk III MHs. In the picture, they are formed in a firing line... The standard tactic of the day,, which had replaced the two rank close order formation, from the late 1870s, in theory anyway... Cheers.
***** Hi there. I think that the Martini spanned two distinct eras and what was advanced at the beginning was woefully out-of-date by the end... When it came to service, in the early 1870s, it had metallic cases (although rolled) where the French and German had paper cartridges for their breechloaders. By the end (in the late 1880s/early 1890s), both the Germans and the French had magazine rifles and the French even had smokeless powder and high velocity, small bore rounds. As a stand alone single shot breechloader, it is quite slick and I would think that it is easier to use than a bolt action rifle firing singly...... (see the similar clip with my Lee Metofrd here... ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html) The lack of magazine was really the aspect that condemned the rifle to history... Cheers.
David M. Hi David. No, I don't think that they would have an appreciably slower rate of fire. Maybe a slightly adjusted technique, though, due to the lever's curve being a bit farther back. Cheers.
Excellent experiment and great video as always.:) like you say would have been different under battle conditions, I think the Martini was an excellent weapon but around the same time the US had the Winchester 1873 model (The Gun That Won The West ) and what seamed a more advanced weapon, is this true and why did the British Army not adopt the Winchester, Supply and demand, politics ? I know the Mk1 1871 was a couple of years before the Winchester but I have often wandered why the British never took up this weapon, may even of changed things at Isandlwana with its more rapid fire ?
The Winchester 1873 differs from the Martini-Henry dramatically in calibre, the Winchester while having the benefit of a tube magazine fired a pistol calibre bullet where ass the Martini fires a large .455 slug. The British Army did actually examine a Winchester rifle during trials in the 1870s but quickly discounted it when a round accidentally detonated in the magazine. As for Isandlwana, perhaps so but rate of fire was not actually the major factor in the overwhelming of the British line.
Happy to help! Well if the accident hadn't happened they might have considered it but the Winchester's .44-40 was a lot less powerful than the Martini Henry's .577/450 cartridge and the British were big fans of stopping power. It wasn't until Browning worked on strengthening the Winchester's action in the late 1880s that the Winchester could be chambered in larger calibres.
Tee Campez Thanks for the kind words. This is a most interesting conversation that you and Mathew are having.... I think that he hit it right on the head.... The Winchester was not powerful enough... Remember that the American Army was using the Trapdoor Springfield until the 1890s when they replaced it with the Krag... Sure there might have been Winchesters and Spencers in Army service, but the main Infantry weapon was a single shot breechloader in 45-70 at the time of the MH. Custer's Last Stand is a good example of this fact... The American Cavalry were armed with Trapdoor Carbines... I agree with the observations regarding firepower. Close in, they would have been devastating... Can you imagine, say, if the rear of the square at Abu Klea was armed with repeaters? The Sudanese were close but I would argue that they wouldn't have made so close... But when you are engaging targets at 500+yds, that little 44-40 round would have "bounced off" if it made it there at all... Thanks fellas, for the good conversation, it makes the channel so much better...
britishmuzzleloaders Very interesting and have learned a lot here on your great channel. So the Winchester although a great weapon was not used as much by the US army as I thought. I can fully understand that its use at close quarters would have been an advantage but at range the good old Martini tops the bill :) a very interesting conversation chaps and I thank you both for putting me straight, I am now to search on the Trapdoor Springfield riffle . Keep up the good work on this most excellent channel.
wow. you would have met the requirements for shooting easily. You tested at 5 shots but I think the second rank may have managed one or two extra if the front held the charging enemy for a few seconds
After watching this video repeatedly, I strongly suspect that a prepared trooper with a Martini could deliver more firepower than his Lee Metford Equipped Brother for say 80 rounds. You up to proving me right or wrong? Once you get to the Lee Enfield with the charger bridge I expect it to be much closer but with the Martini eventually going down in defeat.
+britishmuzzleloaders Yeah, quite a french concept, like the Mle 1897 and the Chauchat had a baby. More seriously, it would be useless on a battlefield, as you showed, the gun overheating after a few volleys. But i'm pretty confident you could shoot faster than two riflemen with a gunner and a loader. And possibly with better accuracy too, giving the rifle to the better shot. Only practical in a static situation, of course. Oh, and nice video, btw ! The fist thing i should have said. :)
Just having watched "battlefield detectives" on the battle of Isandlwana, I've come to wonder how come their experiments with the Martini Henry saw the rifle jam after just 11 rounds fired in rapid succession? Yours clearly keeps on ticking. Could it be because they used the flimsy rolled brass cartridge cases whilst you were using drawn brass cases?
britishmuzzleloaders Looked like they were using the foil cases yeah. As the gun heated up it started to jam. They attributed the jam to black powder fouling at high temperatures. The rifle was IIRC an original piece from the south african campaign as well. Im just curious why it jammed when yours seems to have no such issues, and pondered wether it could be because you're using the more rigid drawn brass cases. Could be an interesting experiment for you to replicate I think.
They were certainly not using foil cases... :-)..... I recommend "How Can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook for an in depth look at the reality of the battle.... Ian Knight is another fine reference. Most of the older books and such cannot be relied upon to discuss actual factors... The jamming issues can be summed up like this.... Most people want to focus on the battle and make up reasons why it was such a defeat.... The jamming issue is an old favourite... if jamming was such as issue, then why did it not present itself at Ulundi, or any of the other battles including Rorkes Drift, as a battle losing factor?.... There were many battles of the Zulu War and some were bigger than Islandlwana... Jamming there?.... So how can this possibly be an issue in just one battle?.... It can't,..... BUT, it can be used by certain (contemporary) individuals to help excuse such a catastrophe... :-) If you like, there are many Martini videos on the Channel, some of which features rapid fire... The last "Riflechair Challenge" video features the Martini and 20 rounds in rapid succession. Cheers!
Just rewatched the show and it turns out I misrembered the number of rounds it took to jam the rifle, in actual fact it took *24* rounds fired to jam the gun in their test, not 11 (not sure how I remembered it as 11 shots ??), and this certainly makes a difference. Thus I'm really curious wether or not this would happen for you as well if you were to fire the rifle in quick succession using foil cases for atleast 25-30 shots. Barrel would be very hot at this point. As for the foil cases, they did present a lot of foil cartridges, so I think it's reasonable to assume they used such cases for the test, but their example did eventually jam regardless. Also to be fair they didn't put the actual defeat down to the jamming of the rifles, the defeat they mainly attributed to poor readiness and the spacing out of the troops in too wide of a firing line. Jamming was simply added as a contributing factor as they asserted that as the battle raged on problems with jamming would've presented itself for atleast a number of soldiers, and with such a wide gap between each soldier due to the spaced out firing line such jams would've left big vulnerable holes in the line for the Zulu to exploit. Here's a link to the part about the rifles: ruclips.net/video/3pQSwo6Dyjs/видео.html It should also be noted that they cite the hot & dry climate of natal as a factor contributing the jamming. Btw I just want to make clear that none of this is an attempt at explaining away the loss of the battle to faults with the Martini Henry rifle, as in my personal opinion the Martini was one of the better std. issue rifles of the time, and I infact don't believe any other std. issue military rifle available in the world at that time likely would've made a difference, esp. if the jamming was due to black powder fouling as then they would've all run into the same problem as the Martini. Only if the use of foil cartridges made jamming more likely could other rifles which relied on the more sturdy drawn brass cartridges likely have made a difference (most certainly not tide changing though), but then once again no fault would then lie with the Martini rifle but rather with the ammunition. All that said, foil or drawn brass cartridge cases or not, the only smallarm I could see as likely having changed the outcome had every man been armed with one would've been the 1876 Winchester lever action, but no army had these as std. issue rifles, so in short no army would've likely faired much better in the situation if we assume the same state of readines and tactics were used.
bellator11 , our discussion could rage for many pages, I'm sure.... :-) Were there jams?.... of course, all rifles jam for any number of reasons, but for this to have been a cause of the defeat (even in microcosm) it would have had to happen to a huge number of troops.... Like I said, where was this problem at Rorkes Drift, Ulundi, and many other battles?...There are many general issues that this program raises, but don't forget, that it is a television program... "if one soldier's gun jams, this weak link could be the vital window through which the Zulus could pour...".... This is complete rubbish... A man with a jammed rifle is not going to make a difference in the ability to keep off the Zulu at the ranges that actually were used in the location mentioned. What, thousands of Zulus are going to "pour" through a gap of 5-10 yards?....The front of the attack (in front of the British troops) was held at range during the beginning part of the battle. This demonstrates someone's fundamental lack of understanding of how the battle was fought. This passage of the program paints a picture that the thin, extended line of troops was face to face (i.e. at close range) with the Zulus, fighting them off and then one man has a jam and then (maybe) the Zulus could get through like water through a crack.. Things don't work that way... In the end, there is so much to read about this battle.... my recommendations have proved to be most useful to me. This program may make "some" interesting points, but they are taken out of context or put in the wrong one... in my opinion.
The Henry, would do quite well in close range engagements as it is a lever action repeater... the Martini would hold it's own with the Trapdoor as they are of similar vintage and capability...
@@britishmuzzleloaders the reason I wanted to know is because I would really like to see it in Red dead redemption 2 along with the Kasa and Jingasa which are Japanese Hats
@@britishmuzzleloaders video Game don't worry about it Just wanted to see the Henry Martini in The game RDR set in 1899 America I apologize if I confuse you but you make very nice content keep it up
When you said "How 'bout some rapid fire with the Martini-Henry." My reaction was "How 'bout it!" in excitement. I really like the minutia of 19th century British tactics and weaponry you show on your channel and I grew up on the Niagra river just a few hundred meters from Ontario. So when I hear an Canadian accent I start dropping my vowels. BTW: what province do you live in? Because those are some serious trees and mountains you film around.
Is it just me but when I see him running towards the camera at the start...I expect the video to cut away and say "ITS!!! Monty Pythons Flying Circus"? Not watched this before, I am a more recent subscriber.
BennettC Hi there. King's Royal Rifle Corps (Home Service) in the firing line... 1880s. P82 Valise Equipment with clip-on waterbottle. Note loose slings with sling swivel on the butt (peculiar to Rifle Regiments). Cheers.
I sincerely hope you are Canadian ( no offence if you are) because if you are not and have the Other North American Accent I'll be REALLY quite the opposite of happy and calm about the videos you make.
Okay , sorry about the harsh first comment , your videos are great , we have quite alot in common I think , good to see those weapons are being cared for properly and still being used , and sorry about that comment , Iam sure you can understand how you might feel if a American was making videos on this , it would be nigh sacrilege. Keep up the good work and Goodluck and Goodshooting , from Australia : )
ANZACS100 Thank you. I am glad that you like them and find something interesting in them. I can assure you that they (the weapons) get all the care and attention they deserve. Cheers.
Hennessy Blues No offence taken at all. I just don't see where you are hearing an accent that isn't Canadian. Very proudly born, bred and residing in Canada. Cheers.
Excellent demostration! Tanks for this video!
***** Thank you very much. It was fun to make... I mean, how can you not get a grin on your face with a bit of Martini rapid fire....!
love the comparison at the end nicely done by having the two vids runnings at once
donoghue666 Cheers. I thought it might add some relevance to the experiment....
Thanks for a great series of videos on the Martini Henry rifle and the making of the ammunition for the several variants.
If you ever plan to visit Scotland, let me know and I’ll teach you how to wear and walk in a kilt
Thanks again, really enjoyed your videos.
Haha.. :-) Glad you enjoyed them. Cheers.
Man that gun sounds awesome. And packs a punch :)
Been watching some of your vids and I'm thoroughly enjoying them. The background stories are epic as well. Keep up the great work!
Hi Cristian. Glad they appeal! Cheers.
Excellent! That Martini looks like a real beast to shoot. I'll bet a guys shoulder is black and blue after a100 rounds.
pdalko It is stout, but not as bad as one might think... 12 gauge is more violent in my opinion. Cheers.
At the battle at roared drift in South Africa some British soldiers fired that many rounds from the martini they received dislocated shoulders
Joseph Gillon I don't see how anybody could get a dislocated shoulder from firing a Martini... Was it sore after many, many rounds? Yes... I'm sure it was.
Official story search it on RUclips regimental history the British army Royal welsh regiment
9 minutes 50 seconds watch it from there
I love these experiments you do. Thanks for the interesting content.
Cheers!
Wow you are living my dream.
If only you lived in Europe and had 10 guys with you.
The best line in the Zulu movie - "And the Martini-Henry"
Glad to hear you enjoy the Channel. Cheers.
I sure do appreciate the effort that you put into these videos. I am so excited to be getting a M-H again, it’s been too long. Watching your videos really made me realize how much I miss mine.
Thank you!
One theory on the reason for the British defeat at Isandlwana was that the rapid firing of the MH led to the barrels overheating and fouling.
Sounds a more plausible reason than the discredited, but still aired, theory that the ammo boxes couldn't be opened quickly enough or, even sillier, that they turned out to be boxes of biscuits...
I strongly encourage you to read "How Can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook. Brushes by all the bumf, and focusses on the manoeuvre and real reasons the battle was lost. This is a great book.
Also check out 'The Hill of the Sphinx: The battle of Isandlwana' (2002) by F.W.D. Jackson.
Now I need to paint up some more Zulu War minis... (and buy a Martini Henry and the Valise equipment. .*coff coff*) :-)
Ed Wilson You won't be disappointed if you decide to do it!
Another sensible and informative presentation. My one reservation is that in an open engagement, the opportunity for prone shooting might be limited. I have only used the Martini-Henry action in a .22 target rifle many years ago (four decades +) but I have to admit that as far as I can recall, it was much easier to use than a BSA bolt action rifle using .22 in the prone position (but the BSA was a more accurate firearm).
John Brooks Very interesting point. Would you care to elaborate on your "reservation"? I should think that there would be no less opportunity than any other position. Obviously, vegetation, etc,... would play a part. Were you speaking of this kind of "restriction" (terrain based) or more about the battle formation making it more unlikely? I'd echo your point about the speed of the action vs a bolt... In single fire, though I have not timed it properly, it does feel like the Martini is faster than my Metford. Cheers.
britishmuzzleloaders
I think it rather depends on whether the rifle was being used by a line regiment where standing and kneeling were usually the major (only?) options or by a Rifle Coy when a two man unit acting independently and perhaps, covertly.
John Brooks
continued - Infantry engagements were likely to follow the 'Waterloo' pattern until very late in the 19th century when the Boer War made those tactics obsolete and the Martini-Henry already was a thing of the past.
John Brooks I see what you are getting at. The Franco-Prussian War was a bit of a watershed, though. It took a bit of time to come up with a tactical solution of their own but by 1877 it was in print... The 1877 Field Exercise and Evolutions of Infantry clearly delineates the "new" way of fighting. I might direct you here www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=9531 . This is a conversation about the very thing you mention.... Extended order tactics were used a great deal beforehand during the Mutiny and other post Crimean actions but were typically used for screening and skirmishing and not as a way to bring the main body into action. In the 1877 FE&E, they were enshrined as the primary method of attack and defence. The wars in the Cape leading up to the AZW featured them prominently and, in fact, the bulk of the Battle of Islandlwana was fought in extended order, initially, quite successfully I might add... It was the fact that the British were outflanked and not overwhelmed frontally that ultimately led to the demise of the forces there... Now, were these tactics used at every opportunity? The wars of the mid-to-late Victorian era are awash with bad judgment on behalf of the senior leadership. Magersfontein being a classic example... Lang's Nek another... battalions caught in column or even (inexplicably) quarter column, far too close to the enemy before extending... This speaks to the leadership and not necessarily the tactics as prescribed. The single rank fighting line was very much a part of training and operations of the Army of the day.
In the "rank entire" fighting line, the men were free to choose their own positions to use. Prone, kneeling, or standing were all prescribed according to the cover at hand. The notion that the later Victorian Army fought exclusively in the two rank, close order line of Waterloo is somewhat misleading. The default formation from the late 1870s was "Extended Order" and although the close order formation was indeed used in 2 and 4 ranks, this was a tactical adaptation to the mass onset of an enemy host as at Abu Klea and Ulundi and indeed later at Omdurman, and a need to effectively eliminate the flanks of the forces on the field.
Anyway, thanks for clarifying your observations. I enjoy discussing these things as you may be aware :-). Cheers.
These are great vids and a fascinating watch. Nice to see the good old girls handled by an experienced user. Thanks and keep up the great work.
+sandmanhh67 Thank you for your kind words. Glad you enjoyed it! Cheers.
Something about shooting the martini henry, looks so fun. I cant wait to get mine!
Indeed!
Ripping video , old chap. Much appreciated. I'm an old fart who has shot both long rifle and carbine Martini Henry originals and had the bruises to prove it. :-) Not nearly as fast as you though. I'm from Tasmania btw...once the pink bit at the bottom of the globe. :-) Cheerypips.
+Sean Coyne Thank you Sean. Glad to hear from another Martini shooter, and on the other side of the Ocean.... Do you still shoot them?
Not in twenty years or so, I'm afraid. The Martinis belonged to two friends, one who had an artillery model carbine, passed down from his grandfather and another who was a collector/dealer who had several M-H rifles over the years. I still retain a strong gut feeling for these particular guns though. Zulu and all that, I guess. Cheers.
Whoa, who would have thought that all this time scrounging for supplies I'd need to reload my own .577/450 the guy you recommended for brass lives only six hours away across the state!
Excellent video, and it's always nice seeing videos pop up showcasing these wonderful old rifles
J. Cosmoline Thank you. Glad you liked it. Martyn is a great fellow. His brass is good and he has moulds and dies (his own "brand") now too... Cheers.
"How *boat* some rapid fire with the Martini Henry?"
.........aight.
In 1968 (12 years old), I bought one for $35 through the mail. I got ten rounds of ammo in one of those heavily waxed little boxes. After shooting those ten rounds, we couldn't find .577/.450 ammo anywhere. After a year, my uncle sold the rifle for $100. I saw one converted to .303 for $400. I should have bought it.
Wow.... prices of yesteryear.... :-)
Excellent demonstration. Thanks for making it.
Famine2k You are most welcome. Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders What i dont understand is.,, you grab the rounds from your pouch.. but why dont you grab like 3 at once. Everytime you have to look down to your pouch is time you miss shooting.
Ricardo8388 My thoughts are that this technique is very much a "range-ism". A parlour trick... Done to show how fast you can shoot a breechloader like the Martini. Most of the time, those that demonstrate this are shooting at nothing, or nothing that represents a man at military ranges, anyway....."Look at how fast I can shoot the Martini!..I'm not hitting anything, but look at all the smoke!"...This is completely inapplicable to military shooting.. If you examine where the time in the loading and firing sequence is taken up, most of it is during aiming.... This is increased as the range does...
Ever tried to hit a target with a hand full of rounds jammed into your mitt while trying hold the forestock? How about taking a handful of rounds out of the pouch (with the right hand), then transferring them all without dropping any, to the left hand, while the left hand is holding the rifle? Can it be done? Somewhat, but it just doesn't have any context in the contemporary musketry practices. Not at all "the drill".....
That said, you are not the first person to mention this. This will be the subject of an upcoming video!... Thanks!
britishmuzzleloaders Yeah my point was that there is a way inbetween taking 1 bullet from your pouch at a time.. and placing all the bullets infront of you. I understand that 1 was for when you possibly want to move and the other was more stationary.
tldr": I suggested this as way inbetween.
Thanks for your reply. and Ill hope to see that vid. bb
i liked this whole 'experiment" something that isnt considered is that one of these rounds would easily go through a man and kill the unfortunate behind him. These bullets do horrific things to flesh
Glad you did... Cheers.
You're obsessed and I'm impressed, Thank you for the informative and very interesting videos.. I'll be watching more for sure, Cheers. :)
You are welcome! I'll take that as a compliment... :-)
Last nite I was playing Cards with some Natives, Zulus?, No, I won five pounds.
He who puns...
Well done Robert. Excellent demonstration. -Rob
Thank you.
You find a British accent weird? this man is Canadian,maybe you can't understand the connection between Canada and the UK huh?
Excellent quality video, content and display wise!
madeline koster Thank you very much. Glad you enjoyed it.
Ok, you are awesome as you take the time to reply.
madeline koster For me, the discussion is as important and enjoyable as making and posting the videos. Thanks for commenting. Cheers.
Great video as always, but in the start sequence I expected you to go "It's......" as it was reminiscent of the style of the opening to Monty Python.....
Only with less facial hair.... :-)
Have had a love affair with the martini-Henry since seeing the Zulu films, keep up the good work sir
That movie has done plenty for awareness of the Martini, for sure!
I concur about X Ring services. Fast delivery, nice looking brass.
Top Drawer for sure!
you sure do a scientific approach to your videos but still easily understood
Glad you understood them!
Sean,
There is a book by a guy called (Colonel) Mike Snook who wrote (among others), "Beyond the reach of Empire: Wolseleys Failed Campaign to Save Gordon & Khartoum". In it he deals at some length with firing tactics of the MH especially as the Battle of Abu Klea was fought with the short lever MH & was where the British square was supposedly broken. From memory, the approved method (in a square) was for the MH to open fire at 600 yards, the killing really started at 400 approx. & usually the enemy went to ground or died by 150 yards. Unfortunately at Abu Klea the enemy swarmed out from a sunken Wadi only 150-200 yards away & they had skirmishers out of the square as well. Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem to commemorate this fight.
Approx. 12 years later when the British came back to smash the Mahdi's army they had transitioned to the Lee Metford & none of the enemy got closer than 800 or so yards. The Egyptian troops fighting with the Brits & armed with the MH stopped the enemy at some 250-300 yards. Both were in square & the ground was flat & open.
A good book to read, especially in conjunction with watching this video, which I really enjoyed...keep them coming :)
Peter
By the way Mike Snook was the last commander of the 24th before amalgamation & while in the UN forces in the Sudan he visited & walked the battlefields there.
Peter Martini I'm a bit confused if your comment is directed at me or someone else (I'm Rob, by the way) .... I don't see a reference to a "Sean" in these comments and am a little confused. That said, I have all of Mike's books and they are amongst the best written military history books I have read. I think that the tactics of the day are best described as those that army trained with and those that were developed in theatres according to immediate needs... The baseline tactics of the high victorian era were very much of the extended order variety, intended to be used against, what today we might call "first world enemies".. These figured prominently in the first phases of Islandlwana and were successful in developing firepower enough to stop the advance of the Zulus to the front (as I am sure you are aware). The resort to close order tactics was required due to small forces operating in open country with no way to channel the advance of the enemy to the front. That and having to protect the baggage left the only resort of closing up and forming all-round defence... To say that "the British fought in squares" (my quotes here) is a bit like saying the modern army fights from Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) and with open topped, light vehicles (as they have done in Afghanistan) rather than with tanks and IFVs and bags of Armoured Artillery and Engineer Support... Similar tactics were used at Omdurman, yes, but they weren't in square.. They were in a curved line with the flanks anchored on the Nile with gunboats in support. The ranges that the enemy were engaged at were astonishing though, weren't they? Your use of the word "smash" is quite appropriate... As you might notice, I like talking tactics, especially when in conduction with the rifles shown here on the channel.. Thank you so much for your input. Cheers.
britishmuzzleloaders Rob,Sorry about that......I will claim a senior moment :( & my apologies).I have finally found & just moved on to "Khartoum: The Ultimate Imperial Adventure" by Michael Asher, so I hope to learn a bit more about Omdurman. I have only found bits & pieces in general history's to this point.It would be interesting to test the Lee Metford against the MH for rate of fire...probably double at least.Cheers, Peter
Peter Martini No problem at all, my good man. Just wanted to make sure that it was intended for me, that's all (not wanting to interrupt a conversation you might be having with someone else) If you haven't seen it yet, ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html I did a similar video with the Lee Metford... I suppose that I could combine the two into a side by side.... But for now, the two are stand-alone clips... Interesting results I must say. I had fun doing both, for sure. Omdurman was certainly the best example of the capabilities of the magazine rifle in "savage warfare". One thing to note though, rate of fire surprisingly has very little to play in these battles with great distances involved... Almost all fire was delivered in volleys, measured and deliberate... No that said, the back corner of the square and Abu Klea, certainly had it's share of rapid independent fire, I'd be willing to bet!!!
"So here's to you, Fuzzy Wuzzy, at your 'ome in the Sudan.
You're a poor, benighted heathen, but a first class fighting man "
Indeed!
Great vid, I didn't know single shot rifles were capable of such rates of fire. Potentially 15 aimed shots in a minute with a ready and convenient supply of ammo? That's the kind of rate of fire I'd expect from a Mauser or Mosin.
+NormanMatchem The Martini is really quite a slick action. As you say, with a ready supply of ammo, it does perform quite well.
Brilliant, thank you. At Rorke's Drift. as I'm sure you know, each capable man fired over 200 rounds and barrels got REALLY hot as well as fouled. I once fired 50 rounds rapid from my Mk IV and was in pain from recoil around 40 and when I'd finished 'em all I wondered at the stoicism of the troops firing 200 and more but then, of course, they were fighting for their lives.
I get my brass from the same source as you and it's great and certainly the best value for money anywhere. Thanks again, mate.
+David Phillips You are welcome. Glad you enjoyed it. Martyn is a good friend and has a great product. An asset to the hobby, for sure.
Cheers mate. Martin is a Brit who lived in Oz and now Washington state. I'm a Brit who came straight from England to BC, Canada so I'm a trespasser in your, and now my country.
I love Martin's brass and my bullet moulds come from him too, his prices are just marvellous and he's a very helpful bloke.
I'm having fun lately with my 1896 MLE cavalry carbine. I can't afford a Metford so I'm using Pyrodex instead of smokeless and pretending it's really a Metford. I can't help it, I just love the smell of smoke.
Have fun. Cheers and thanks again.
David Phillips Trespasser? Come on now.... May I ask why you are using Pyro in 303? (other than the "loving the smoke" bit) I just ask because there is a misconception out there that "Metfords" are specifically for black powder and nothing could be farther from the truth.
Yes mate. I know that I can use smokeless, I generally clean the bore a bit after shooting by running a few rounds of 4895 through. Much faster, more accurate and less recoil but it doesn't have that magic smell. I've got an old 1853 Enfield too and get more smoke from it, I'm a great polluter but can't help it.
I'm a retired old fart so not very well off but I am saving up for a Brown Bess and maybe, one of these days, a Baker rifle (even more smoke from a flintlock). Even my handguns are black powder though the Tranter .455 and Enfield .476 can handle smokeless and I use it often but always revert to my filthy habits.
Sadly, the Lower Mainland here doesn't have facilities for big bore shooting so we (my son and I) have to go into the bush to shoot; actually that's much better than any range. We always clean up afterwards and try to recover spent bullets too, people leave enough junk without us adding to it.
Thanks a lot for the tip and if you're ever around here come and blow holes in stuff with us. I think it would be fun for all.
David Phillips I hope that I didn't come across as insulting your knowledge of these fine rifles.... I had no intention of being so. As you might imagine, I come by many people who believe that Metfords were for black powder and the way I read your post gave me the slightest impression that you might have been under that belief... WHEW! Glad to hear I was misunderstanding! A Tranter, eh? I fired one a few years ago in Alberta (I think that there is footage of it in one of the "Alberta Shoot" clips here on the Channel) Fantastic bit of Victorian technology, if somewhat complicated... Took a bit of getting used to, what with the "double" trigger. Glad to hear you are slowly working towards some more old stuff.. If you are at all handy, go for the Baker Kit from the Rifle Shoppe... Great project. Is your P53 an original?
Very well done and informative video sir.
+DavidAkhter Thank you very much. Glad you enjoyed it!
Great job! According to accounts, some 23,000 rounds were fired at Rorke's Drift by a garrison of c.100 - that's 230 rounds per man over about 12 hours, although 10 of those were at night! Many suffered dislocated shoulders and some were forced to shoot left handed.
A dislocated shoulder from shooting a Martini....? Would like to see the reference for that!
Dislocated shoulders are referenced in David Rattray’s account of the battle, in his audiobook, The Washing of the Spears. I think he refers to letters written by some of the 24th.
Sorry, I mean Rattray’s book The Day of the Dead Moon!
I guess some men must have fired over 300 cartridges of the older type (Durnford refers to thin brass, distorting and jamming in the breeches). Did these give more (or less) recoil? I also guess some shots would be rushed and the butts not secure in the shoulder. I've never fired a Martini but I have some experience of the .303 Lee Enfield and after many rounds, this leaves a bruise and is painful to shoot. We used to put our berets under our battledress for extra padding but it didn't make much difference.
A comparison of recoil between the Martini and the SMLE would be interesting and between the original thin brass round and later hard casing.
Incidentally I seem to remember Bromhead or Chard referring to burying some 370 Zulus and estimated that about 400 were carried away on war shields - 23,000 rounds and 770 enemy killed or wounded! Like Isandlwana, the outer area is littered with bullets and I picked one up and have it in my small collection...
I know Durnford died at Isandlwana and I'm referring to Rattray's book again - regarding the jamming of the thin brass cartridges. I have one and examples are on display at the Royal Welsh Museum in Brecon - they look quite fragile.
I'd love to see how the Martini-Henry compares side-by-side with the Springfield 1873 trapdoor in terms of rate of fire when both are being used by practiced shooters. It seems like the mechanism of the Martini-Henry is a lot less troublesome than that of the Springfield, even without the anecdotal evidence of horrendous failures to eject...
I imagine that it would be somewhere in between the Snider and the Martini. You still have to deal with the lock but it has an extractor that functions a bit more efficiently when compared to the Snider.
Great job as usual. I have been hoping with the good weather we have been having that you would get out and produce a new video. Vicariously yours, Gunner
Definitely perfect weather for a shoot.... Cool but magnificent.... Cheers. Wanted to stay and do more but only had the time for 1 1/2..... I began another on finer points of Martini shooting.... Cheers.
Rourke's Drift, they started with 30000 rounds ended with a few hundred left. 12 Victoria Crosses given.
Yes,... there was a lot of ammo fired at Rorkes Drift.
An interesting era, very transitional. With one foot in the archaic and one foot modern. I would've rather had a Henry rifle if I had the choice, but I don't think the British soldiers were allowed that. lol Thanks for taking the time and putting these vids together!
+LordDigz12 Hi there... It was generally regarded that the repeating arms of the era were woefully under powered for the ranges that it was envisaged engagements were to take place at. The mechanisms weren't strong enough for the kinds of cartridges that gave the requisite velocities and ranges. Hence most militaries, including the US Army, stayed with full bore 45cal cartridges... 577/450, 45/70, etc... and single shot breech loaders. From a personal defence standpoint, I agree, something like a Henry would have been very useful.. The SMG of it's day, I suppose.
I think the bigger reason the Brits didn't want to use American technology was because of their own pride. Especially after the Winchesters started coming out with bigger bore cartridges. It was clearly superior, but it wasn't British so it was frowned upon by her Queens military. They never really adopted lever guns to any extent, they just skipped into the bolt guns. I'm wondering if they had some battles against mausers where they got their butt whipped and had to switch to a bolt gun. Even then, everyone else used a Mauser action for the most part and they had to make their own bolt design with the Lee Enfields. Brits are a funny lot, gotta do it their own way or it doesn't count. Yanks are more practical, willing to use whatever technology that works, who cares where it came from.
LordDigz12 I can't say that I'm in total agreeance with some of your points... I don't typically delve into generalizations about national character, so maybe the facts as I know them...
What was the main service rifle of the US Army before the Krag? I don't believe it was the Henry or the Winchester.... It was the Trapdoor Springfield in 45-70, if I'm not mistaken. A single shot breechloader.....
As for using other peoples designs, the first breechloader in British (and Empire) Service was the Snider-Enfield... with an American (Snider) invented breech mechanism attached to the existing British (Enfield) barrel. The next rifle, the Martini-Henry, was the product of a Swiss (Martini) action and a Scot's (Henry) barrel. Their first repeating rifle was an American (Lee) action with an Englishman's (Metford) barrel.
The development of military firearms was quite similar in the two countries, when you look at the timelines...
+britishmuzzleloaders You've made a great channel here - by the way.
Very informative and enjoyable!
Butts Lane Thanks very much! Glad you enjoy it.
Rob. The opening scene reminds me of that scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail where John Cleese storms the castle single handedly.
If I started the beginning again and again, yes... 🙂
Gosh I love your vids :D
So british ^^
There should be a german version of you too out there :)
German (late XIXth cent) war-culture is awesome too.
PS: and a french one aswell :D
Blank- blade Thanks for the kind words. Yes a German "version" would be most interesting. Needle Rifles and percussion muskets for comparison... Fantastic! Now, some-one needs to step up... :-) Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders Don't forget the Mauser 71, Mauser 71/84, the 1888 Commission rifle or the Mauser G98, all very interesting rifles.
I have actually given thought to creating a channel that would be either a German or French version of your channel, do you have any recommendations for doing so, especially sources for information about German or French equipment, uniforms and regulations of the era?
You look like you could have walked out of one of those photographs toward the end! Would love for you to find a way to test something akin to the early rolled brass and foil cartridges and see how they stood up to rapid fire. Thanks for another great video.
RabidMortal1 Yes, that would be a great test... Unfortunately, as you indicate, a very rare and expensive undertaking... As much as I would like to see that experiment, I'll have to pass... :-). Thanks for the kind words.
nice video!, I just received 3 martini henrys that were used by my family in the boer wars, love all your vids on them !
+Evan King Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks. Great acquisition... 3? What Marks are they?
+britishmuzzleloaders yes there were 2 people in my family in the boer wars and when they came back to Canada they brought 3 martini henrys with them one is marked vr Enfield 1887 IV 1 and the other 2 have had the main markings worn off,show more use but still function.
+britishmuzzleloaders yes there were 2 people in my family in the boer wars and when they came back to Canada they brought 3 martini henrys with them one is marked vr Enfield 1887 IV 1 and the other 2 have had the main markings worn off,show more use but still function.
Excellent job. Life in the old girls yet.
Lots of life, yes. Cheers.
I shall have to try this with my Trapdoor.
I wonder how big of a difference it would've made if the British soldiers at Isandlwana had been issued with drawn brass cartridges instead of the flimsy brass foil ones, as the latter apparently often caused jams after about 20 rounds fired.
Not one little bit. Ammunition wasn't a problem at Isandlwana in either supply or quality.
@@britishmuzzleloaders Well according to documentation they had issues with the brass foil expanding and getting stuck in the breech. Also they tested it with brass foil casings in a modern experiment where it seiged up after about 20 rounds. It's why they switched to drawn brass cartridges and a longer lever.
@@bellator11 What sources are you referring to? Apart from routine stoppages and the like, the performance of the rifle and ammunition did not detract from the overall performance of the Infantry. i.e. ammunition was not a factor in the defeat. As for the "modern experiment", please show me where to find a reference to shooting 20 foil cartridges for science. I am very keen to know more. It all raises interesting questions. If ammunition was so horrible and compromising of the effectiveness of the Infantry, then why is it that there is nothing associated with the performance of the same unit at Rorkes drift where the men fired many times the amount fired per man at Isandlwana... How did they win at that later battle?.... It's because the rifles and their ammunition performed the way they were intended and as well as any of the era. While there were indeed major issues with the ammunition in the Sudan, later in the 1880s, these were related to the way in which the cartridges were carried and the conditions of service in that campaign. It was this event that led to the manufacture of drawn brass which incidentally never fully replaced the foil versions. The long lever was indeed an "upgrade" to the overall design but was never used in British regular service. The short lever Mk II being the primary arm of Army units it's replacement with the Lee Metford in the early 1890s. If you are interested, I heartily recommend acquiring Neil Aspinshaw's great book on the Martini. By far the best reference on the subject.
@@britishmuzzleloaders The experiment I am refering to was carried out for a documentary made in the early 2000's, you can watch it here: ruclips.net/video/2rAQBWdi1Og/видео.html
@@bellator11 Thanks for that. I am indeed familiar with that piece. So much of it is such conjecture. The temperature of a barrel "soaring" to 45C?.... hardly soaring... a bit of sensationalizing going on there. And there is more... how does barrel fouling equate to coating the "highly machined precision fit" parts? How is it that gases coat the inside of the action body?... they don't of course. More bunk for the benefit of the camera and pushing a narrative. The cases he shows, are not "damaged".. they are the way they came. The breech of the Martini was made large to accept the somewhat loose tolerances associated with the ammunition. He does indeed experience a "jam" of sorts but have a close look... he hardly pushes at all when he is loading it and then puts no effort into trying to extract it... turning to his partner like some sort of lost puppy... clearly not familiar with the weapon. What is the ammunition they are using?... they don't show the use of original rounds for some inexplicable reason.... Did they load them themselves?.... Did they include the proper, fouling managing wax inside? I don't know... but neither does anyone else as they don't bother to explain anything. "The only tool a soldier had was his bayonet (to remove a stuck case) "????? how about the cleaning rod that every rifle had.... Again, pandering to some crazy notion and an audience that is uneducated on the subject.... "The few seconds wasted by one gun jamming could have been the weak link in the British line"...... I mean really... are they familiar at all with military operations of the era? It goes on and on.... "It is statistically, almost certain,.. that guns jammed that day"....... Of course they did.... While there were stoppages and jams, as there are in every action, and there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that there were specific examples with the Natal Native Mounted Contingent under Durnford, "jamming rifles" was not a cause of the defeat. How did they win at Ulundi? Rorkes Drift? Kambula? Gingindlovu?.... It all does not add up.
Hey, that target can be fixed! Hammer on it a bit to flatten it out, a nice welding job, a bit of bondo and prime and paint. Good as new!
Better be a biiiggg hammer tho... Maybe just get another one.
Excellent video!
+Whitpusmc Yeah, I'd need a bigger hammer than I've got.... :-) ...Thank you. Glad you enjoyed it!
On the topic of the barrel heating up
I have heard (not seen direct sources however) that at Rorke's Drift the fighting was so fierce that during the night some of the British soldiers' martinis started to glow they were so hot - It'd be very interesting if true.
Great quality video as per usual by the way
hookypig your profile pic made my day
hookypig Most rifles, on campaign, I understand, had a rawhide cover that wrapped around the rifle between the receiver and the backsight, just for that purpose... Later the "hand guard" concept, albeit one of wood, was incorporated into the design of the Lee Metford and the later Martini-Metfords. I should think that putting a black powder round into a red hot barrel would be quite dangerous with ignition coming soon after (if it actually happened the way your indirect sources claim).... Sorry, not going to make a video about that one! :-)
britishmuzzleloaders On the heating up on the Martini at Rorke's Drift it was said that many tore away there Frock/Tunic sleeves to wrap around the barrel of the rifle, it was that hot ?
Gen Scinmore Thankyou I made it myself haha
britishmuzzleloaders I bet serving in Africa it didn't help the soldiers deal with the issue much!
hookypig Yes, it does take much longer to cool the barrel down when it is in direct (and warm) sunlight....
Terry, there are always things that happen that are anomalies, but widespread ripping off of ones sleeves, the sleeves of the only garment they had, less the greatcoat, seems a little far fetched... Maybe the sleeves of the dead??? Maybe their grey backs? ... It was often a practice to have a hand guard of rawhide around the barrel. Now, did the 2/24th, being new to SA, have such things? You would have thought that they might have learned from their 1st Bn, who had been in SA much longer, about the ramifications of high rates of fire...
Makes me want a Martini-Henry!
JohnnyH1982 John, take it from me, they are easy to be hooked by....
6:10 wow, other you is an utterly fantastic dodger
Haha... fast running...
The mealy bag ramparts! Flashman and the Tiger!
The fact you can put that number of aimed rounds down in the time it takes a man to run 100m fills me with admiration at the courage and discipline of the Zulu warrior. Even though, and no offence Rob, a 20 year old Impi Warrior would cover that ground in less time.
Oh to be 20 again.....
Great clip and rifle. This example would also give an idea regarding the Austro - Prussian (1866) and Franco - Prussian (1870) Wars in terms of the advantage of how the Prussians had the breech-loading Dreyse Needle Gun compared to the Austrians who still had muzzle-loaders, and in the Franco Prussian War the French had the Chassepot Rifle with it's rubber ring seal / range 1.500 metres (versus 600 metres for the Dreyse): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War . Regards.
+Film & TV Yes the Prussians certainly had the advantage against the Austrians (and the Danes). They compensated for the lack of range in their rifles with their artillery in the F-P war... Glad you liked the clip. Thanks.
Love the Martini Henry, but IMHO the Mauser 1871 was the best rifle at the time.
I did a similar experiment with my 1889 Mk. II BSA&M. Started with 6 rounds stuck in the right side of my belt, to simulate loading from an expense pouch. Fired at a 50 yard gong target offhand, to simulate "fire into the brown of 'em!" Fired all 6 in 30 seconds and rang the bell 5 out of the 6.Now multiply that effort by an entire rifle company. Is it any wonder that the British Army kept the Martini in service as long as they did?
Nice! I like the fact that you tried to duplicate the function of equipment, even though you didn't have any... well done.. This is how you truly come to learn how these were used, not firing off a bench, or carrying your rounds about in a box.. (not that that is a bad thing, just not something to draw conclusions from).
My grandfather served with the 50th Battalion CEF, 1916-18 (10th Bde., 4th Cdn. Div.) Did some similar experiments 30 years ago with the P08 web equipment and a Ross Mk. III and Sht. LE Mk. III. As you said, I learned a lot from them. Unfortunately, I can't repeat them, because the waist belt shrunk in storage :-). Would have liked to do them with the Oliver equipment also, but I've never been able to assemble a complete set. Also did some WW-I demos for high school history classes (kitted-out a football player and used a deactivated Sht. LE Mk. III DP rifle) which were well received. Your videos are excellent and well researched. Thanks!
The British stood in line at Islandawanda, they didn't lay on the ground.
Oh?.... They were in extended line at the beginning, with large intervals and amongst rocks... By no means universal, but yes, they did lie down as cover and arcs allowed. As the withdrawal began and intensified, this became less and less until the companies were able to concentrate and by that time, the Zulu were close enough, and the battle fluid enough that standing of kneeling was more prudent...
Tee campez they did not want the winchester as they thought they would be too underpowered and when fighting tribes who do not fear death it may take a couple of rounds with the winchester but with a martini henry it would take a limb off
Oliver Wilson I think that you are correct in surmising that it was an issue of power...
Cheers Oliver :)
That's an interesting point. After Plevna you would have expected a world wide run on Yellow Boys, but it never happened.
Like your Forage cap
Cheers.
Top notch video again, great experiment and the results of which are of great value to anyone who is a keen student of this period. Hope you are able to find a new target for the next video. I can imagine what the rates of fire would be for the Lee Metford repeated out under the same conditions (hint hint) :)
Greg King Thank you very much. The target is still usable, if a little mangled.. I will probably just hammer the back of it into place and keep using it... But if I'm shooting 577/450, I'll reserve it for greater ranges.. As for the Lee Metford, I actually did a similar clip here... ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html
It isn't quite the same, as I didn't put the shoot into any "tactical context" like I did with this one.. but did measure the time for three firing techniques that were performed with the MLM... That said, at Omdurman, volleys were opened at 1000+yds... and not one Dervish got within something like 500yds.. (reference required here, but it was a long way out) Those Dervishes advancing on the Native troops armed with the MH got to within 300 or so ( if I recall correctly) Now this wasn't just rifle fire but added to it was Artillery and gunboat fire.... Impressive nonetheless. Cheers.
Cheers Rob, very interesting stats, opening volleys at 1000 yds must have been a sight to be seen and heard. The Keri plain was well chosen ground I guess as it must have had a pretty good clear field of fire even allowing for heat haze and dust. A Dervish at 300yds is as close as I would want to get anyway. Look forward to the next video.
Greg King I did some more reading and I was a little "off" with the "1000+" comment... It would seem that, though I was not incorrect, the range was a much more extreme 2000ish yds.... With the enemy stopped at 800yds...... The Martini armed troops had a smaller, though no less safe coupling of ranges... 1000 and 500yds, respectively.... With these kind of ranges, the MLMs would have used their long range volley sights (dial sights) as the ladder maxed out at 1800... Of course, the Martini only had the ladder sight...
Still devastating effects at these ranges and the last great Battle against mass irregulars. I've given you a shout out on our Die Hards facebook page and the chaps are well impressed by your videos.
Greg King Thank you so much... I try in my own way... I like to call what I do "Historical Shooting"... I like to think of it as a small but "potent" genre of historical interpretation. What I don't have is some mates to practice and develop the shooting more. File firing, Independent firing, etc.. stuff that needs more than one man.... Live fire with a couple of files worth of interested parties would hit the nail on the head. Thanks again for your very generous comments. Cheers.
Wonderful video as always!
What's the proper name for your hat at 7:14 ?
Kilmarnock bonnet... Part One of the Kit Series for more info! Cheers.
I hate been so late to this perfection I'm sorry brother 🇬🇧
Glad you enjoyed it!
Watch the b&w intro at x1.25/x1.5 speed for that genuine pre-ww1 feel.
You can almost see the end of the barrel vibrating with each shot
Almost.
I saw a documentary that discovered the rifle would jam after about 15 rounds because the barrels for extremely hot. Would be interesting to see how long rapid fire can be maintained for before a jam.
+thewyj Although this video doesn't show more than 10 rounds fired (with no hint of bad extractions mind you) I have fired upwards of 20 in one application... The rifle was very not, too hot to touch. No problems. I think that lots of the TV and internet claims as presented in documentaries are baseless, or certainly out of context, rambling... They never back up anything they say with historical facts... How did they "discover" these "facts"?...... Did they use historical, rolled case ammo in some experiments? Did they uncover some documents that related to testing? Martini jamming is far more convoluted than a simple statement saying it jams after 15 rounds, and much more anecdotal... Were there jamming issues? Yes.... most sensationally during the Sudan Campaigns in the mid1880s... An inquiry was had and drawn brass made and shipped very quickly to the troops there. As for the test you mention, pushing my rifle by firing relentlessly until it jams is not quite on my list of must-dos.. :-) .... Though the experiment is a good one and would be good to do with "someone else's rifle"... :-) BTW, which documentary were you watching? Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders Yea I agree. I did wonder how many times they had to repeat the "test" before it did jam and then they simply put that version into the final edit and claim "there you are you see! It jams ALL the time!" The claim for the jam was that the cartridges used black powder which left a residue inside the chamber each time it was fired, eventually the residue build up meant a fresh round would not fit in. I cannot remember the name of the documentary because it was many years ago when I was going through my imperial musket and rifle fighting phase, but it focussed on the British defeat at Isandlwana. The programme wanted to assert that one of the reasons the Brits lost was because the rifles jammed, but then in the same programme they asserted that the British were not firing in shoulder-to-shoulder formation and instead maintained a very spread out defensive perimeter. They based this on finding groups of ejected cartridges found in the ground which were 8-10 feet apart, where soldiers had been standing and firing. Shoulder-to-shoulder formation would have resulted in much more concentrated casings apparently (makes sense I guess, not an expert). So they sort of undermined their own argument within the space of 20 minutes. I do remember one thing that was supported by your video and that was the power of the rifle. They tested a ballistic block and it passed through and into a second, indicating that a single bullet could probably hit two or more people if charging in dense formations. Thanks for your knowledgeable response by the way, makes me want to go away and do more research!
+thewyj Thanks for that... Perhaps the best book I have read specifically about Islandlwana is "How can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook. Fantastic book... So, extended order to begin the battle far in advance of the camp... yes... This is the way the Army trained to fight in the late 1870s and after... As the book explores, the reason that the battle was lost, was due to the untimely and uncoordinated withdrawal of the right flank (Durnford) due to lack of ammo and his being threatened by outflanking himself, which had a chain reaction effect and forced the main part of the fighting line (starting with it's right flank), which had been holding the "Chest" at bay, to conform.. This lessened the fire from the companies of the 24th and allowed the Chest to advance... Essentially the battle was won due to a massive outflanking and the disintegration of the fighting line and the resulting loss of the ability to maintain a steady fire that could have won the battle. As I said, a simply great book... Cheers.
+britishmuzzleloaders ah fantastic . I'll have to have a look at that book. I haven't visited this topic in years and suddenly I'm really excited about it again. A fascinating period of history.
+britishmuzzleloaders "due to lack of ammo"
Anecdotally; The Quarter Master insisted on a written requisition for ammunition above the regulation amount, from the appropriate authority in the firing lines. The British quarter master corp also insisted that the paper 10 round pouched ammunition, be sealed in heavy tin containers lined with oiled heavy paper, which were then placed in heavy wooden boxes and screwed shut! Archaeological digs at Islandlwana have proven this out as a number of rifles butts were unearthed that had been broken, by soldiers using them to attempt to smash open the wooden ammunition boxes to gain access. Sad.
I've heard of it referred to as a man stopper I can see why.
460grs...
If the enemy was charging your position the time spent aiming would have been reduced greatly. Twelve shots a minute from the pouch would be doable especially if you grabbed two bullets at a time and palmed the second while you shot the first. I have to say that the Martini Henry rifle has a special place in military history: it combines a faster rate of fire and removes the paper cartridge but is still slow enough to warrant the old line system of firing of the musket age.
+Blake Titus It is interesting to note that the Army had evolved it's tactics in regards to fighting a similarly armed enemy... I presume that by "the old line system of firing of the musket age" you refer to a two rank, close order line? In actual fact, tactics introduced in the late 1870s prescribed a loose, single rank line with supports to the rear to plug gaps and re-enforce where necessary. This was used at Islandlwana and other lesser well known battles of the era all over the globe. There were obviously, times where close order formations were used, but these were predicated on the lack of anchored flanks, the need to protect the baggage (Ulundi and Abu Klea, etc..) and, most importantly, the lack of an effectively armed enemy rather than the development of firepower.
+britishmuzzleloaders thank you that is interesting. I suppose that when facing an European army loose ranks would mean less casualties and put an increased emphasis on marksmanship. The British being perhaps better trained and armed had the advantage against armies still fielding muskets. But when facing Zulus or a more melee focused army closer, double or even triple ranks would be needed to stop a charge, especially one which contains a lot of men, perhaps a wedge formation. Thanks for the info!
+Blake Titus If you are interested in the Zulu Wars and the tactics and formations used at Islandlwana, I might recommend Mike Snook's book, "How Can Man Die Better".... Single rank with large intervals did actually stop the Zulu.. It was the collapse of a flank that did the position (and the 24th) in that day.... Great read.
Ic, thanks for the recommendation.
britishmuzzleloaders I've read that there were no real tactics involved at Isandlwana but utter chaos,desertion and pandemonium and all "led" by an officer with zero field experience. Is there any truth to that then?
Do you suppose that moustache-style could have an effect on rate of fire with a breech loading rifle? You know? More bushy, versus less bushy... upward curls as opposed to straight-tip? Perhaps different waxes? Excellent shooting, by the by.
Yes.... the bushier, the faster... I've got a long way to go.
excellent video, as i have come to expect from you good sir!
i'd like to add, bertram brass, in australia, as a producer of correctly head stamped .577-.450 short chamber boxer cases
also, i'm wondering haw many people caught the veiled reference to Lt. (later Col.) John Rouse Merriott Chard VC!!
kingswoodkid1985 Yes Bertram brass is certainly an option but it so very expensive. It's rim is certainly more robust than the 24g brass... as are the case walls. If it was in my budget, I'd be all over it... :-). Cheers.
no worries! now you know how us aussies feel regarding basically everything else! lol, just too damn expensive! thankfully, bertram is made here, so it's not budget breaking
Very cool, I have got to get myself a Martini in 577/450!
Xavier Temple Do not walk, RUN, to your local Martini Henry store and buy one!
britishmuzzleloaders Got the import permit, and it has shipped! ;-)
Xavier Temple That is great news... Let me know when you get it... If you need brass, I recommend Martyn at xringservices@yahoo.com. Thinking of posting any clips of it? Look forward to hearing about it.
How long is the cartridge overall length to be able to continue firing like that without swabbing or blow tubing?
It is just over 3".... I sized it so that the bullet just touched the lands and then backed it off a few thou to accommodate fouling.
@@britishmuzzleloaders Thanks!
Great video! I love the Martini Action! Do you know what type of Infantry you show at 6:19? The group with the gray/black uniforms and the spiked pith helmets.
Glad you like it. They are KRRC (King's Royal Rifle Corps), distinguished by their red facings and piping, which were one of the two "english" Rifle Regiments... The other being the Rifle Brigade. They are wearing rifle green uniforms, including a rifle green "Home Service Helmet", with 1882 Pattern Valise Equipment and probably carrying Mk III MHs. In the picture, they are formed in a firing line... The standard tactic of the day,, which had replaced the two rank close order formation, from the late 1870s, in theory anyway... Cheers.
Thank you so much! I just learned a great deal!
Joshua Redman You're welcome.
Great tash.
+TechGaming45 Thank you!...
Hello, great video! What were Martini's pros and cons over the early bolt action rilfles from the same period?
***** Hi there. I think that the Martini spanned two distinct eras and what was advanced at the beginning was woefully out-of-date by the end... When it came to service, in the early 1870s, it had metallic cases (although rolled) where the French and German had paper cartridges for their breechloaders. By the end (in the late 1880s/early 1890s), both the Germans and the French had magazine rifles and the French even had smokeless powder and high velocity, small bore rounds. As a stand alone single shot breechloader, it is quite slick and I would think that it is easier to use than a bolt action rifle firing singly...... (see the similar clip with my Lee Metofrd here... ruclips.net/video/g8fbszT8MKs/видео.html) The lack of magazine was really the aspect that condemned the rifle to history... Cheers.
Awesome, thanks for the answer!
do you think that the later long lever martini rifles would have an inferior rate of fire from the prone?
David M. Hi David. No, I don't think that they would have an appreciably slower rate of fire. Maybe a slightly adjusted technique, though, due to the lever's curve being a bit farther back. Cheers.
Another great video, shared it over on www.historicalfirearms.info, always worth the wait for a new video!
Matthew Moss Thank you Mathew. Glad, as always, that you find something worthwhile to share on your site. Cheers.
Excellent experiment and great video as always.:)
like you say would have been different under battle conditions, I think the Martini was an excellent weapon but around the same time the US had the Winchester 1873 model (The Gun That Won The West ) and what seamed a more advanced weapon, is this true and why did the British Army not adopt the Winchester, Supply and demand, politics ?
I know the Mk1 1871 was a couple of years before the Winchester but I have often wandered why the British never took up this weapon, may even of changed things at Isandlwana with its more rapid fire ?
The Winchester 1873 differs from the Martini-Henry dramatically in calibre, the Winchester while having the benefit of a tube magazine fired a pistol calibre bullet where ass the Martini fires a large .455 slug. The British Army did actually examine a Winchester rifle during trials in the 1870s but quickly discounted it when a round accidentally detonated in the magazine. As for Isandlwana, perhaps so but rate of fire was not actually the major factor in the overwhelming of the British line.
Matthew Moss Nice one Matthew cheers, so if that round did not explode in the Winchester ? thanks for that as always wondered about that question : )
Happy to help! Well if the accident hadn't happened they might have considered it but the Winchester's .44-40 was a lot less powerful than the Martini Henry's .577/450 cartridge and the British were big fans of stopping power. It wasn't until Browning worked on strengthening the Winchester's action in the late 1880s that the Winchester could be chambered in larger calibres.
Tee Campez Thanks for the kind words. This is a most interesting conversation that you and Mathew are having.... I think that he hit it right on the head.... The Winchester was not powerful enough... Remember that the American Army was using the Trapdoor Springfield until the 1890s when they replaced it with the Krag... Sure there might have been Winchesters and Spencers in Army service, but the main Infantry weapon was a single shot breechloader in 45-70 at the time of the MH. Custer's Last Stand is a good example of this fact... The American Cavalry were armed with Trapdoor Carbines... I agree with the observations regarding firepower. Close in, they would have been devastating... Can you imagine, say, if the rear of the square at Abu Klea was armed with repeaters? The Sudanese were close but I would argue that they wouldn't have made so close... But when you are engaging targets at 500+yds, that little 44-40 round would have "bounced off" if it made it there at all... Thanks fellas, for the good conversation, it makes the channel so much better...
britishmuzzleloaders Very interesting and have learned a lot here on your great channel. So the Winchester although a great weapon was not used as much by the US army as I thought. I can fully understand that its use at close quarters would have been an advantage but at range the good old Martini tops the bill :) a very interesting conversation chaps and I thank you both for putting me straight, I am now to search on the Trapdoor Springfield riffle . Keep up the good work on this most excellent channel.
They could have used you at Rourke's Drift!
Sounds like a smal canon
It is a small cannon... :-)
wow.
you would have met the requirements for shooting easily.
You tested at 5 shots but I think the second rank may have managed one or two extra if the front held the charging enemy for a few seconds
+Ben Baker Sure! Any delay in the enemy getting closer would have just increased the number of rounds that could have been brought to bear.
volley and/or independent fire...from prone!?
+kenns9 What other type of fire could you use in the prone position?
Battle of Duck Lake? or duck and cover....
Have you ever fired cordite or smokeless powder loads in it?
No I have not.
Do you make your own ammo ? I know it takes a while to make and it is quite expensive to buy .
Anthony Hings Yes I do... More info here... ruclips.net/video/l7DDGgE0wU8/видео.html
Yes , i have just seen your video . I should of researched first before i asked the question lol . Good stuff , Really is a labour of love .
After watching this video repeatedly, I strongly suspect that a prepared trooper with a Martini could deliver more firepower than his Lee Metford Equipped Brother for say 80 rounds. You up to proving me right or wrong? Once you get to the Lee Enfield with the charger bridge I expect it to be much closer but with the Martini eventually going down in defeat.
80 rounds?..... you gonna come and load it all for me?... :-)..... A Martini and Metford comparison is a great idea.
You will have to come to the Mountains, of Maine, USA that is, but as an inducement I will BUY the rounds new factory loaded 80 each :-)
Now, with another serving as loader.
+canicheenrage Crew served Martini..... now there's a concept!
+britishmuzzleloaders
Yeah, quite a french concept, like the Mle 1897 and the Chauchat had a baby.
More seriously, it would be useless on a battlefield, as you showed, the gun overheating after a few volleys.
But i'm pretty confident you could shoot faster than two riflemen with a gunner and a loader. And possibly with better accuracy too, giving the rifle to the better shot.
Only practical in a static situation, of course.
Oh, and nice video, btw ! The fist thing i should have said. :)
canicheenrage Thanks!
Just having watched "battlefield detectives" on the battle of Isandlwana, I've come to wonder how come their experiments with the Martini Henry saw the rifle jam after just 11 rounds fired in rapid succession? Yours clearly keeps on ticking. Could it be because they used the flimsy rolled brass cartridge cases whilst you were using drawn brass cases?
Did they use foil cases? From what I remember, not a very well done piece, that..
britishmuzzleloaders Looked like they were using the foil cases yeah. As the gun heated up it started to jam. They attributed the jam to black powder fouling at high temperatures. The rifle was IIRC an original piece from the south african campaign as well. Im just curious why it jammed when yours seems to have no such issues, and pondered wether it could be because you're using the more rigid drawn brass cases. Could be an interesting experiment for you to replicate I think.
They were certainly not using foil cases... :-)..... I recommend "How Can Man Die Better" by Mike Snook for an in depth look at the reality of the battle.... Ian Knight is another fine reference. Most of the older books and such cannot be relied upon to discuss actual factors... The jamming issues can be summed up like this.... Most people want to focus on the battle and make up reasons why it was such a defeat.... The jamming issue is an old favourite... if jamming was such as issue, then why did it not present itself at Ulundi, or any of the other battles including Rorkes Drift, as a battle losing factor?.... There were many battles of the Zulu War and some were bigger than Islandlwana... Jamming there?.... So how can this possibly be an issue in just one battle?.... It can't,..... BUT, it can be used by certain (contemporary) individuals to help excuse such a catastrophe... :-)
If you like, there are many Martini videos on the Channel, some of which features rapid fire... The last "Riflechair Challenge" video features the Martini and 20 rounds in rapid succession. Cheers!
Just rewatched the show and it turns out I misrembered the number of rounds it took to jam the rifle, in actual fact it took *24* rounds fired to jam the gun in their test, not 11 (not sure how I remembered it as 11 shots ??), and this certainly makes a difference. Thus I'm really curious wether or not this would happen for you as well if you were to fire the rifle in quick succession using foil cases for atleast 25-30 shots. Barrel would be very hot at this point.
As for the foil cases, they did present a lot of foil cartridges, so I think it's reasonable to assume they used such cases for the test, but their example did eventually jam regardless. Also to be fair they didn't put the actual defeat down to the jamming of the rifles, the defeat they mainly attributed to poor readiness and the spacing out of the troops in too wide of a firing line. Jamming was simply added as a contributing factor as they asserted that as the battle raged on problems with jamming would've presented itself for atleast a number of soldiers, and with such a wide gap between each soldier due to the spaced out firing line such jams would've left big vulnerable holes in the line for the Zulu to exploit. Here's a link to the part about the rifles: ruclips.net/video/3pQSwo6Dyjs/видео.html It should also be noted that they cite the hot & dry climate of natal as a factor contributing the jamming.
Btw I just want to make clear that none of this is an attempt at explaining away the loss of the battle to faults with the Martini Henry rifle, as in my personal opinion the Martini was one of the better std. issue rifles of the time, and I infact don't believe any other std. issue military rifle available in the world at that time likely would've made a difference, esp. if the jamming was due to black powder fouling as then they would've all run into the same problem as the Martini. Only if the use of foil cartridges made jamming more likely could other rifles which relied on the more sturdy drawn brass cartridges likely have made a difference (most certainly not tide changing though), but then once again no fault would then lie with the Martini rifle but rather with the ammunition.
All that said, foil or drawn brass cartridge cases or not, the only smallarm I could see as likely having changed the outcome had every man been armed with one would've been the 1876 Winchester lever action, but no army had these as std. issue rifles, so in short no army would've likely faired much better in the situation if we assume the same state of readines and tactics were used.
bellator11 , our discussion could rage for many pages, I'm sure.... :-) Were there jams?.... of course, all rifles jam for any number of reasons, but for this to have been a cause of the defeat (even in microcosm) it would have had to happen to a huge number of troops.... Like I said, where was this problem at Rorkes Drift, Ulundi, and many other battles?...There are many general issues that this program raises, but don't forget, that it is a television program... "if one soldier's gun jams, this weak link could be the vital window through which the Zulus could pour...".... This is complete rubbish... A man with a jammed rifle is not going to make a difference in the ability to keep off the Zulu at the ranges that actually were used in the location mentioned. What, thousands of Zulus are going to "pour" through a gap of 5-10 yards?....The front of the attack (in front of the British troops) was held at range during the beginning part of the battle. This demonstrates someone's fundamental lack of understanding of how the battle was fought. This passage of the program paints a picture that the thin, extended line of troops was face to face (i.e. at close range) with the Zulus, fighting them off and then one man has a jam and then (maybe) the Zulus could get through like water through a crack.. Things don't work that way... In the end, there is so much to read about this battle.... my recommendations have proved to be most useful to me. This program may make "some" interesting points, but they are taken out of context or put in the wrong one... in my opinion.
Someone please . Was this demonstration using black,powder or smokeless ammunition. Pleaee
It was black powder.
Many thanks
0:42 "aboot"
Said I, never.... "How 'bout" is more like it...
a bandolier would make sense
+NeuKrofta Sure, but I don't know if it would be any faster than out of the expense pouch... Mounted Infantry were equipped with bandoliers.
britishmuzzleloaders digging in a pouch gets clunky.
But you have to admit, bondoliers are badass.
How would the Henry do against the Trapdoor Springfield
The Henry, would do quite well in close range engagements as it is a lever action repeater... the Martini would hold it's own with the Trapdoor as they are of similar vintage and capability...
@@britishmuzzleloaders the reason I wanted to know is because I would really like to see it in Red dead redemption 2 along with the Kasa and Jingasa which are Japanese Hats
@@user-tq4fw9mv2f I'm sorry. I have no idea what you are talking about.
@@britishmuzzleloaders video Game don't worry about it Just wanted to see the Henry Martini in The game RDR set in 1899 America I apologize if I confuse you but you make very nice content keep it up
@@user-tq4fw9mv2f Ahh... I see.. the Martini was obsolete in front line service by 1899...
How 'bout it!
How 'bout what?
When you said "How 'bout some rapid fire with the Martini-Henry." My reaction was "How 'bout it!" in excitement. I really like the minutia of 19th century British tactics and weaponry you show on your channel and I grew up on the Niagra river just a few hundred meters from Ontario. So when I hear an Canadian accent I start dropping my vowels.
BTW: what province do you live in? Because those are some serious trees and mountains you film around.
Got it! ..... :-) Glad you enjoyed it and the Channel...!
Is it just me but when I see him running towards the camera at the start...I expect the video to cut away and say "ITS!!! Monty Pythons Flying Circus"? Not watched this before, I am a more recent subscriber.
Cheers! You're on the right track!... Have a look at the Cabin Fever Challenge Shoot 2020 video.... 😉
@@britishmuzzleloaders Lol, I forgot about that one.
Ever use sofa or tin cans for target practice?
Yeah.
What' the uniform at 6:30?
BennettC Hi there. King's Royal Rifle Corps (Home Service) in the firing line... 1880s. P82 Valise Equipment with clip-on waterbottle. Note loose slings with sling swivel on the butt (peculiar to Rifle Regiments). Cheers.
britishmuzzleloaders Rapid response! Cheers!
I sincerely hope you are Canadian ( no offence if you are) because if you are not and have the Other North American Accent I'll be REALLY quite the opposite of happy and calm about the videos you make.
I meant American
ANZACS100 I see... I am Canadian. Please remain "happy and calm"... :-)
Okay , sorry about the harsh first comment , your videos are great , we have quite alot in common I think , good to see those weapons are being cared for properly and still being used , and sorry about that comment , Iam sure you can understand how you might feel if a American was making videos on this , it would be nigh sacrilege. Keep up the good work and Goodluck and Goodshooting , from Australia : )
ANZACS100 Thank you. I am glad that you like them and find something interesting in them. I can assure you that they (the weapons) get all the care and attention they deserve. Cheers.
Were you raised in Canada and faking the accent, or did you move to Canada from the UK?
Hennessy Blues Faking an accent? Don't quite know what you're talking about, my friend... No faking going on here....
I don't mean any offence, I just don't know any Canadians with that accent. So I guess you moved there.
Hennessy Blues No offence taken at all. I just don't see where you are hearing an accent that isn't Canadian. Very proudly born, bred and residing in Canada. Cheers.
that's weird, you sound like a brit a little. but I guess i'm just hearing wrong. cheers
Hennessy Blues ... You're hearing it wrong. He has the most Canuck accent I've ever heard.
Tee
Gotta stop watching these. I'm getting a hankering for a MH!
+Jeff Brown Do not resist.... Go towards the light..... (by light, I refer of course, to that shining example of mid Victorian firearms engineering!)
krag was better
I love "apples to oranges" comparison models...
@@britishmuzzleloaders both are rifles.
@@pieterwillembotha6719 Both are fruit.